This is a recent exchange that was initiated by a creationist chap, named Andrew Sandstrom, who took exception to an old Blog posting I wrote about Sarah Palin and the Republican Expelled Creationist gang. If you have followed my writings you know I wasn’t particularly receptive to the Republican’s fundamentalist religious preoccupation as cynically perpetrated by Karl Rove. Here is Andrew’s reply to me:
Intelligent Design is very limited when it comes to a creationist point of view. It’s assuming that the earth is billions of years old, when it really isn’t. (Here we go again! -EJB)
The Geological column and several key theories brought it about. And assumptions that places like the Grand Canyon take many many years to form. (And this is an interpretation, not fact. It’s never been proven.)
Our dating methods have been proven wrong a long time ago. Although, once evolution started leaking into mainstream media and everyone had started to accept that the earth is billions of years old, nobody dared question our modern-day methods except darwinists. (Not sure what the point was with this comment- EJB)
And now we’ve been repeatedly fed this bull crap about how the earth is billions of years old. We’re now looking upon every other theory as immediately dismissable.
Watch Kent Hovind’s creation series. You’ll find that the modern-day creationist views are ‘very’ different than ID. ID is still a way for humanists who don’t believe in a God but also don’t find evolution a very reliable theory to explain life. Ex: There was a designer, but it’s never showed itself to us. (This guy is hard-core so of course you can’t trust humanists -EJB)
You can believe whatever you want, all I’m saying is that evolution is an interpretation of the FACTS. Grand Canyon existing is a FACT. That it was created over millions or billions of years is THEORY. It cannot be observed so it cannot be proven.
In short: Show a little more respect to another person’s beliefs. Just because you believe in evolution doesn’t mean you’ve come along more intellectually.
Oh, and Kent Hovind’s website: http://www.drdino.com
(One of Hovind’s articles is titled “The Grand Canyon, Things That Make Evolutionists Look Stupid,” see name calling is not relegated solely to intellectuals -EJB)
My Response:
“There is no darkness but ignorance” and this is especially evident when religious zealots talk about scientific observation. You realize that with the advent of laser and computer technology and now through GPS, we can actually measure mountains rising and tectonic plates spreading apart, right? Or don’t they teach these scientific facts in your religious compound? (Okay, I was being bitchy but these denials are so hard to take early in the morning!)
For example, the massive Indo-Australian plate is still moving at 67 mm or for you metric phobes, about 3 inches a year. That very same plate is still pushing up the Himalaya Mountains. So do the math and by multiplying by millions of years, and use a calculator if you must, to see how the earth is constantly changing over time. So don’t give me that crap we haven’t seen it. You might as well argue that the GPS in your car doesn’t work while you are it. Speaking of which, I didn’t see my car being built but it’s a pretty safe assumption it was built by Americans in a U.S. factory (?) and not by angels in heaven (hopefully not by devils but that could explain a lot!) And yes, I do buy American!
Religious zealots chose to conveniently ignore the facts and look for weakness along the fringes of science hoping beyond hope to see some personal glimpse of God. Albert Einstein tried to do the same and he failed miserably by the way so I don’t think you’re going to fare much better. That’s why we call it faith by the way. And faith is fine but don’t tell me you have the right to teach this ignorance in a public school. It’s important to separate the teaching of science from the preaching of faith and you just have to look to the Taliban to see where religious ignorance will lead you.
Oh, as to the link to that Creationist site look if you must for a needed laugh but it’s more of the usual Creationist denial and crapfest material. I like the negative article about the chickenosaurus, which is an attempt by biologists to turn genes on and off to recreate a ancestral dinosaur from it’s descendant: a common everyday chicken. For example, they have been able to grow teeth in chicken embryos which is pretty impressive by playing around with a few genes. As to the ethics of doing this, well that is another matter. Here’s a better link:
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/discoblog/2009/03/10/will-jurassic-park-ever-really-come-true/
Finally, as to the state of my intellectual development, well I am reminded of an old Archie Bunk quip when Meathead commented to Archie about how Archie should be wanting more for his children. To paraphrase Archie’s comment he said “didn’t the gorilla parent want more for his children but there they are, still a gorilla.” I have accepted that there is so much we don’t know and more importantly, in our present physical manifestations as human beings, so much we will never know. In short, I have embraced uncertainty unlike my creationist fundamentalist friends and any supposed intellectual superiority on my part melts away upon personal introspection and a simple gaze at the night skies.
Erik John Bertel
“So do the math and by multiplying by millions of years, and use a calculator if you must, to see how the earth is constantly changing over time.” but you are assuming that the area the mountain is in now was once flat. If God created the mountain at a certain height 6,000 years ago then it growing today does not tell us how old the earth is.
You’re right if you assume god had a certain sensibility regarding landscaping but the presence of marine fossils on the top of certain mountains indicates that they were once at sea level and with their present rate of accretion that had to be more than 6,000 years ago.
And lets take this out of the realm of the earth for a moment. Look at the lunar landscape with its myriad craters that you can see with your naked eye. Now if you follow the Bible the moon was also created six thousand years ago, actually after the earth on the fourth day according to Genesis and all of those meteorite and asteroid collisions had to occur in that tiny time frame. Why isn’t the earth pockmarked to the degree the moon is? Why? Because those impacts occurred billions of year ago and the forces of atmospheric erosion, which are lacking on the moon, eroded most of their presence on the earth over that time.
If you don’t believe in an old earth you now have to account for the moon being created at a different time before the earth and I don’t believe that is the normal reading of scripture. Or you have to create a scenario were god bombarded the moon but chose to spare the earth, you know one of “his” miracles. Not to be blasphemous but god was pretty liberal with his miracles during biblical times but you have to admit “his” modern day miracles have kind of paled in comparison. Or just maybe god likes craters and he created the moon that way just to mess with us. Funny, we just witnessed a comet collision with Jupiter during our lifetime though so that’s a bit suspect. Kind of convoluted thinking in any case wouldn’t you say? Sorry, you have to face it, the Bible makes for a very poor science book.
Marine fossils at the top of the mountains…. Noah’s flood.
Again, the moon has the marks because that is how God made them, have you seen the meteorites hit the moon or are you taking the words of men by faith that it happened?
God’s miracles continue to happen today, you fail to recognize them as such. I never said the Bible was a science book, I only stand by the claim that it is infallible and science continues to agree.
Ah, yes the good old proverbial flood where the traces are everywhere and nowhere. I should have seen that one coming. This imaginary flood that for some reason didn’t mix all the fossil remains altogether into one big jumble but has them laid out in an organized strata. You know the old question about why don’t I find an ancient bunny rabbit fossil bones mixed in with the Triceratops bones argument if they were all in the same flood? Why? Because God likes to mess with us? No? Oh, oh, I know teacher, men lie, right?
You’re for real aren’t you? You are also, of course, discounting the recent Shoemaker-Levy 9 Comet collision with Jupiter during July 1994, right? Have I seen meteorites hit the moon? No, not personally, but I have seen them hit the earth especially on a Hawaiian volcano at night and I even collected samples as a kid. Oh, yes and I also collected fossils.
Here is a YouTube link in case you missed the collisions while you were being home schooled:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5jSNnitGNM
More lies by men, right? And the Bible is the written word of god untouched by mortal men, right? Do you use the King James version but I guess that was untouched by lying men, right?
People, I welcome to the twilight of America thinking.
Erik, you need to try and not put words in my mouth, I never discounted the meteorite that hit Jupiter and I know meteorites have hit the earth, never said they didn’t. I am sure we will find remains of meteorites on the moon when we have long term exploration there. But you can only speculate on the effect a meteorite would have on the moon as we have not seen one.
If evolutionist scientists came across a rabbit bone amongst dino fossils they would identify it as another dino and make up a new name for it because there is no way the bones of a modern creature could be found with older fossils. This does not mean that I think there where modern type bunnys around with dinos, try not to be too shocked, because I believe that all creatures have gone through biological changes over the last 6000 years to adapt to their climates.
As for how did they all settle as they have after the flood, no clue. The Bible doesn’t say and I haven’t done research on it. Others have and they have their opinions on the subject, but of course you would discount anything that goes against your belief in evolution.
America has been heading towards the twilight of thought for the last 50 years and I only see it getting darker.
Interesting, you almost sound rational by acknowledging the reality of meteorites strikes on the Earth and Jupiter but then you go off the deep end by postulating that the moon may have come pre-cratered. That’s a lot of mental gymnastics you do there to rationalize a literal bible. Anyway, too bad about the 6,000 thousand year old fixation. At least I got to put some video in my blog!
I guess as long as your still stuck in that old evolution mind set we will have to agree to disagree and in the end we will find out who is right.
Wow, I feel touched that you would mention me in a new blog. I don’t need to repeat myself in a new reply I sent.
Anyways, onto your moon arguement. There is actually a theory outside of miracles about the moon being filled with craters and that has to do with the fountains of the deep breaking open. With that much pressure on the crust of the Earth, alot of land would have been pushed way above the Earth’s atmosphere as well.
And if you wanna find arguements based off of “Well why is this that way?” Let’s bring up the distance of our moon.
If you say that the moon has been going away on a constant rate based off of gravity’s level of attraction. Y1ou
You know, e=mc2.
The dinosaurs would’ve been extinct due to “Mooning”.
I know it might not have always been constant. But alot of arguements for evolution rely on constants. (Radiometric dating)
Anyways I hope I continue to be a pain in your backside, lol.
Science would ordinarily move on from a theory such as evolution… but people just wanna hang onto it so badly. Because that would mean special creation. The evolutionary theory is the only thing to fight against the judeo-christian theology these days. Have you noticed that evolutionists will specifically attack christians more than any other religion?
Christianity is the one religion that is most feared by Atheists. Because if it’s true, anybody who doesn’t follow God’s laws (which is everybody) or seeks redemption and turns away from their sinful ways as best they can (some), then they shall burn in the lake of fire. Not simply because they sinned and they’re being judged. It’s far more simple than that. But because that’s what people will choose.
Most Atheists would rather rule in Hell than serve in Heaven. Would it make sense to us to force terrorists to live in America peacefully and not cause trouble? And I’m talking about the ones who REALLY hate us. (Not that they don’t have a reason to)
Oh, and onto your previous post. Anybody who tries to justify a war in the name of Christianity is speaking blasphemy.
Oh, and my kids say hello from our local library =P.